BRIDGEWATER — Parents of a seventh-grade student at Bridgewater-Raritan Middle School say their daughter was sexually harassed last year by another student who "tried to force her to engage in nude online video chat," and "invited her to his home to engage in sexual activities," according to an administrative law judge's written opinion.

But the school board decided it wasn't an issue of harassment, and while the girl's family tried to appeal the decision, the case was ultimately dismissed, according to a June report by Administrative Law Judge John R. Futey.

In May 2012, a female student, only identified in the report as E.R., reported to her guidance counselor that she was a victim of ongoing sexual harassment, and that the boy, identified as P.H., attempted to sit on her lap on a school bus, sent her text messages about "hooking up" and tried to get her to come to his house to perform sexual activities, Futey wrote. He did not elaborate in the report on how the one student allegedly tried to force the female student to send him nude pictures or perform sexual activities.

Guidance counselors spoke with both students about the severity of the situation, and after a formal harassment intimidation and bullying investigation — which included student interviews and a search of the female student's cellphone — school officials determined there was no bullying or retaliation, and that the case was being documented as "adolescent sexual curiosity," Futey wrote.

No sexual images were found on the girl's phone during the investigation, Futey wrote.

The parents of the female student wrote to then-Board of Education President Evan Lerner May 24, 2012, to tell him they disagreed with the findings, and requested an appeals hearing.

The hearing was granted after a board meeting June 12, 2012, and on Aug. 28, 2012, the board determined the incident "did not rise to the level of (harassment, intimidation or bullying)," Futey wrote.

CONNECT WITH US

The decision was mailed to the female student's parents Aug. 29, 2012, and on Nov. 27, the parents filed a notice of petition of appeal with the commissioner of education, requesting the commissioner overturn the board's decision.

The parents said the behavior toward their daughter was in violation of the state's Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act.

The commissioner of education, however, wrote back two days later, informing the parents that they failed to submit the paperwork properly, and even failed to file the appeal within 90 days of the original decision, Futey wrote.

When the parents refiled the paperwork Dec. 6, 2012, the case was forwarded on to Futey, who upheld the commissioner's decision to dismiss the case based on the 90-day rule that was violated.

The 90-day rule states that the appeal must be filed no later than 90 days after the petitioner received the final decision from the board of education, which would have been shortly after Aug. 29, 2012, Futey wrote.